RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Cumberland => Topic started by: RossGillbanks on Friday 02 July 21 09:18 BST (UK)
-
Hi all,
I am still searching for the mysterious James Gilbanks allegedly born 1816 according to 41/51/61/71 census'.
since my last post regarding him ( https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=838822.0 )
I have established the 1841 Census kindly linked by another roots user (thank you Trish :) ) that this is the same man. However my problem is I still cant find a marriage between him and his wife Ann Reid born c1821 Roxburgh.
According to these Census' he was born Threlkeld, Matterdale and Patterdale area. I believe these are fairly close together, but I have yet to find anything signifying a baptism likewise I have not been able to find a marriage although I have no idea where they may have married.
On the 1841 Census James Gilbanks is in St Bee's as a Linen Bleacher, in 1851 James and his wife and son are in Penrith workhouse stating they are married. His wife on this is listed as Hannah not Ann which adds confusion as on their sons birth cert she is listed as Hannah. However his Baptism she is listed as Ann. This is the only time the name Hannah is used so it may have been an error of her name being misheard.
I have attempted to search for Ann Reid (also using the name Hannah) to no avail. However my main focus is finding a marriage or a baptism for James currently in order to establish who his parents are.
I do hope I don't bore you all with my posts, I do look elsewhere and try other ways to research but I can never seem to figure this one out! I did an Ancestry DNA test some time ago, although I have matches on my paternal side that are further back than James they are either inactive or dont reply.
-
Perhaps they never married? Or perhaps they married much later than 1851?
My friends grandparents had their first child in 1889 but only married in 1915
On the birth cert you mention - is she shown as Hannah Reid or as Hannah Gilbanks nee Reid
-
His wife on this is listed as Hannah not Ann which adds confusion as on their sons birth cert she is listed as Hannah. However his Baptism she is listed as Ann. This is the only time the name Hannah is used so it may have been an error of her name being misheard.
I have seen several examples of people whose given name was Hannah also being called Ann or Annie.
-
Perhaps they never married? Or perhaps they married much later than 1851?
My friends grandparents had their first child in 1889 but only married in 1915
On the birth cert you mention - is she shown as Hannah Reid or as Hannah Gilbanks nee Reid
That is all I can come up with that they never married or a possible border marriage? She is shown on the birth cert as Hannah Gilbanks Formerly Reid
-
His wife on this is listed as Hannah not Ann which adds confusion as on their sons birth cert she is listed as Hannah. However his Baptism she is listed as Ann. This is the only time the name Hannah is used so it may have been an error of her name being misheard.
I have seen several examples of people whose given name was Hannah also being called Ann or Annie.
I do speculate regarding this, 1851 census and her sons birth cert are the only two things of which she is listed as Hannah that I can find, otherwise she is named as Ann, Anne, Annie etc
-
Have you had a look at Annie Reid born 1st november 1821 in Hawick, Roxburgh, parents George Reid & Christian Turnbull?
-
There is also an Ann Reid baptised 19th march 1920 in Kelso Roxburgh, parents Thomas Reid & Mary Hunter.
-
In Matterdale Thomas & Elizabeth Gillbanks had 5 children baptised George 1801, John 1806, Joseph 1806, Mary 1809 & Benjamin 813, in later census's he called himself John so perhaps this family is worth a look.
-
There is also an Ann Reid baptised 19th march 1920 in Kelso Roxburgh, parents Thomas Reid & Mary Hunter.
I have had a look at both of the ones you have suggested, they are the only two I suspect could be her. My issue being without a marriage between Ann and James I have no way of knowing for sure, however a marriage doesn't seem possible to find as I have been searching for some time with no joy
-
There are marriages for both of these, I think.
1842 Anne Reid and Donald Livingston - Wilton
1848 Ann Reid and George Hawkins - Crailing
-
In Matterdale Thomas & Elizabeth Gillbanks had 5 children baptised George 1801, John 1806, Joseph 1806, Mary 1809 & Benjamin 813, in later census's he called himself John so perhaps this family is worth a look.
I have tried, however one of the archive centres (I forget which one) searched Threlkeld and Matterdale and couldn't find a baptism for a James Gilbanks between 1812-1820 in them areas. The only potential one I have was from Whitehaven a James Gilbanks born 1816 to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks. My issue being again with no marriage I have no way to prove or disprove if this is him. The only thing I have is the 1841 census I have in Whitehaven states James Gilbanks Linen Bleacher which matches to other documents and censuses that state his occupation as linen bleacher in later censuses and documents.
I will add my ancestors always seems to give an area they previously lived in and not the area they where born in. I was told if he was from Whitehaven then they shouldn't have been in Penrith workhouse in 1851 as they wouldn't have allowed them. But this is why I wonder if he gave the place of Threlkeld to be able to go into Penrith workhouse. Also his son was born in Penrith in 1850 would that give them enough leverage to go into Penrith workhouse? I am unsure as to why they went into there however their son was less than a year old at the time of the 1851 census
-
There are marriages for both of these, I think.
1842 Anne Reid and Donald Livingston - Wilton
1848 Ann Reid and George Hawkins - Crailing
Ah that's a shame, I don't even know if her surname was spelt Reid, that is what the sons birth cert states but I have no way of knowing, these two individuals have been the most difficult I have ever came across so far :'(
-
There are marriages for both of these, I think.
1842 Anne Reid and Donald Livingston - Wilton
1848 Ann Reid and George Hawkins - Crailing
The Livingstons are in 1851 census and her details fit.
The Hawkins, though, show Anne born in Langholm, Dumfriesshire so maybe Ann from Kelso could still be around.
-
There were some Gilbanks in Threlkeld
Abraham and Nancy (Heskett)
John and Betty (Relph)
Marriage at Matterdale, 28 Dec 1795
John Gilbanks and Elizabeth Relph
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:N2KT-W9N
Children baptized to John and Betty at Threlkeld on FamilySearch
Mary 1798
John 1801
Joseph 1803
Hannah 1804
Sarah 1807
Benjamin 1809
Then two later at Whitehaven. Are they the same couple?
Elizabeth, 22 March 1815, to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks
Not on FamilySearch?
James, 27 Oct 1816, to John and Elizabeth Gilbank
The only potential one I have was from Whitehaven a James Gilbanks born 1816 to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks.
-
There were some Gilbanks in Threlkeld
Abraham and Nancy (Heskett)
John and Betty (Relph)
Marriage at Matterdale, 28 Dec 1795
John Gilbanks and Elizabeth Relph
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:N2KT-W9N
Children baptized to John and Betty at Threlkeld on FamilySearch
Mary 1798
John 1801
Joseph 1803
Hannah 1804
Sarah 1807
Benjamin 1809
Then two later at Whitehaven. Are they the same couple?
Elizabeth, 22 March 1815, to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks
Not on FamilySearch?
James, 27 Oct 1816, to John and Elizabeth Gilbank
The only potential one I have was from Whitehaven a James Gilbanks born 1816 to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks.
I did speculate if they could be the same couple? Given that James and Ann's son was named Benjamin that does seem to tie up also. The Elizabeth birth I wasn't aware of though in 1815. Maybe they lived in Threlkeld but this wasn't where James was born and he simply didn't know where he was actually born.
I couldn't find James' birth on FS either, but this is a snippet of the email I received from Whitehaven archive centre:
"The 1841 census gives a yes/no answer as to whether the person was born in Cumberland. I found an entry for a James Gilbanks (or Gilburks as he appeared in the index) whose age is within the correct range and was born in Cumberland.
I found a baptism of a James Gillbanks in the records of Holy Trinity Church, Whitehaven, 27 October 1816, son of John and Elizabeth Gillbanks of Quay Street. John was a shoemaker.
However there is no way of knowing if this is the man you are looking for.
I found James Gillbanks on the 1851 census (together with his wife and possibly their son). They were in the Union Workhouse, and James’ place of birth is given as Threlkeld. There is not a baptism of anyone by that name at Threlkeld Church for a period of several years either side of the range of years of his possible birth.
However if he had not been born within the boundary served by the Penrith Union he would have been sent back to where he came from as quickly as possible. It might be worth checking with Carlisle Archives to see when he was admitted to the workhouse and what further information is contained in the register."
of course a marriage would easily confirm this... But that seems to be a mystery which I am sure I will not be able to resolve unfortunately. I suppose what doesn't help is there is many John Gilbanks' in Cumberland in that time period and I am sure there is probably a fair few married to an Elizabeth just for good measure of difficulty. However there Doesn't seem to many James Gilbanks for that time period (actually I couldn't find any!)
-
In the 1881 census he refers to himself as John Gillbanks born in 1806 which would correspond with the John born in Matterdale to Thomas & Elizabeth.
-
I couldn't find many James either!
Sorry, when/where did he die? Have I missed that?
Some useful indexes in various forms, excel, pdf, word
Cumbria Archive Service - family history indexes
https://cumbria.gov.uk/archives/online_catalogues/genindexes/indexes.asp
Whitehaven baptisms, marriages, burials are among them
-
In the 1881 census he refers to himself as John Gillbanks born in 1806 which would correspond with the John born in Matterdale to Thomas & Elizabeth.
I would not trust that census. As per my previous thread which I linked in my op there is many things incorrect with that census.
Benjamin's place of birth listed as Newcastle which the 1851,1861 & 1871 list his place of birth as Penrith.
James' place of birth is listed as Scotland also.
A age gap of 17 years magically appears between James and Ann.
I think we concluded that most likely Benjamin's wife gave the info for that census. Also on James' death certificate his name is listed as James but his age on it makes him born 1804 again, however the informant on that cert is also Benjamin's wife
-
I couldn't find many James either!
Sorry, when/where did he die? Have I missed that?
Some useful indexes in various forms, excel, pdf, word
Cumbria Archive Service - family history indexes
https://cumbria.gov.uk/archives/online_catalogues/genindexes/indexes.asp
Whitehaven baptisms, marriages, burials are among them
He died in Fulham Middlesex 1886, but I would advise reading my reply above as the 1881 census and James' death certificate his age changes suddenly
-
A suggestion only, but in 1851 there is a William Gilbanks aged 12 listed alongside James and family. Birthplace unknown - which one would not expect if he belonged to James and/or Ann. But he is there with them, so possibly family?
On 30 April 1833 a Benjamin Gilbanks and Mary Kilender married at Whitehaven.
I think this couple turn up in West Derby in 1841, with children Benjamin (6); William (3) and James (7m).
Benjamin snr is aged 30 and a stonemason. Benjamin jnr shows up in merchant marine apprentice records, having joined at Liverpool, birthplace is Whitehaven.
James' birth was registered in Liverpool district in 1840 mmn Killen. William's birth (although census says he was born out of county) was also registered in Liverpool in 1838 mmn Killen.
By 1851, I think both parents have died; Mary aged 28 in 1843, Liverpool district and Benjamin aged 38 in 1845, Wirral district; Benjamin jnr has begun his apprenticeship, and James died in 1842.
Which leaves William, who does not appear to have died between 1841 and 1851.
So if this is the child who is with James in 1851, that would imply that he is close anough family for James to feel responsible for him, so nephew?
-
A suggestion only, but in 1851 there is a William Gilbanks aged 12 listed alongside James and family. Birthplace unknown - which one would not expect if he belonged to James and/or Ann. But he is there with them, so possibly family?
On 30 April 1833 a Benjamin Gilbanks and Mary Kilender married at Whitehaven.
I think this couple turn up in West Derby in 1841, with children Benjamin (6); William (3) and James (7m).
Benjamin snr is aged 30 and a stonemason. Benjamin jnr shows up in merchant marine apprentice records, having joined at Liverpool, birthplace is Whitehaven.
James' birth was registered in Liverpool district in 1840 mmn Killen. William's birth (although census says he was born out of county) was also registered in Liverpool in 1838 mmn Killen.
By 1851, I think both parents have died; Mary aged 28 in 1843, Liverpool district and Benjamin aged 38 in 1845, Wirral district; Benjamin jnr has begun his apprenticeship, and James died in 1842.
Which leaves William, who does not appear to have died between 1841 and 1851.
So if this is the child who is with James in 1851, that would imply that he is close anough family for James to feel responsible for him, so nephew?
Thank you Galium, I did try to look into William previously, however the unknown place of birth led me to a rather difficult search. I hadn't previously been able to narrow his parents down. However I wonder if Benjamin snr who died 1845 was actually the son of John and Elizabeth Gilbanks? He was born 1809 and this would of course tie in if this was the case.
I do have a death cert for a William Gilbanks which I suspected to be the William on the 1851 Census. This William died 1857 aged 18 a labourer in Carlisle. However the informant wasn't a Gilbanks so I felt it was best to let that be for the time being rather than ordering certs left right and centre. Another reason was there was so many Gilbanks' in the Cumberland area in that time period it became really overwhelming to make sure I was looking at the right people to the point that I had set up several Ancestry trees in order to try keep track and even still managed to confuse myself so abandoned that idea. However William might be someone I will try and revisit as you said he might have been of very close relation or its coincidence
-
Cumbria Archive Service - family history indexes
https://cumbria.gov.uk/archives/online_catalogues/genindexes/indexes.asp
Could they provide a missing link? :-\
I noticed a burial at St Nicholas, Whitehaven, 11 March 1818
William Gillbanks, age 5
So born about 1812/13, in the gap between the Threlkeld baptisms and those at Whitehaven to John and Betty/Elizabeth
Have been looking for William's baptism on FamilySearch, and found this one, that might be him?
16 Dec 1813, Whitehaven
William Relph Giblant
parents John and Elizabeth
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:N58Z-XR7
From Bishop's transcripts for Holy Trinity Newchaple, Whitehaven, 1717-1856
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/311688
I'm not sure if this is the same HT as in the Whitehaven databases? Can't find him on there. St Bees?
-
Well the Elizabeth Gilbanks baptism in 1815 is from the same microfilm, 90678
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NB7S-N5K
She is in the spreadsheet from Cumbria Archives.
-
Cumbria Archive Service - family history indexes
https://cumbria.gov.uk/archives/online_catalogues/genindexes/indexes.asp
Could they provide a missing link? :-\
I noticed a burial at St Nicholas, Whitehaven, 11 March 1818
William Gillbanks, age 5
So born about 1812/13, in the gap between the Threlkeld baptisms and those at Whitehaven to John and Betty/Elizabeth
Have been looking for William's baptism on FamilySearch, and found this one, that might be him?
16 Dec 1813, Whitehaven
William Relph Giblant
parents John and Elizabeth
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:N58Z-XR7
From Bishop's transcripts for Holy Trinity Newchaple, Whitehaven, 1717-1856
https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/311688
I'm not sure if this is the same HT as in the Whitehaven databases? Can't find him on there. St Bees?
What are the chances of them being the same couple?
If this is the case then to compile them all together for experimental purposes we would have:
Marriage at Matterdale, 28 Dec 1795
John Gilbanks and Elizabeth Relph
Children baptized to John and Betty at Threlkeld on FamilySearch
Mary 1798
John 1801
Joseph 1803
Hannah 1804
Sarah 1807
Benjamin 1809
Whitehaven On Familysearch:
William Relph Giblant 16 Dec 1813, Whitehaven to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks
Elizabeth, 22 March 1815, to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks
Not on FS or in the Index that I can see:
James Gilbanks, 27 Oct 1816, Whitehaven to John and Elizabeth Gilbanks
William Relph Gilbanks in my opinion is most likely from the same family, as Elizabeth/Betty's maiden name is Relph.
Now I come to think of it James' son Benjamin had a son who's name was Ralph (maybe just coincidence?).
I have asked Carlisle archives for help however they requested that I hire a researcher but I was reluctant to do so until I had a better idea of roughly where James was born.
-
Hi
I agree that the Relph name looks very hopeful, as long as they have it right. Does it really say Giblant though? I would think there is a fair chance it is the same couple who had Elizabeth and James baptized subsequently at Holy Trinity.
That entry on FamilySearch is from a BT (they are not always easy to read!). Perhaps it was a baptism at a Whitehaven chapelry (if there was one) and sent in together with the returns for the mother church :-\ That would be quite usual. Anyway, I can't find William on the spreadsheet!
-
There are some missing years in those BTs, 1816-18.
Which would be why James's baptism in 1816 is not on FamilySearch.
-
Hi
I agree that the Relph name looks very hopeful, as long as they have it right. Does it really say Giblant though? I would think there is a fair chance it is the same couple who had Elizabeth and James baptized subsequently at Holy Trinity.
That entry on FamilySearch is from a BT (they are not always easy to read!). Perhaps it was a baptism at a Whitehaven chapelry (if there was one) and sent in together with the returns for the mother church :-\ That would be quite usual. Anyway, I can't find William on the spreadsheet!
I have just found James on the spreadsheet (James Gilbank on row 7612)
I am sure if someone requested to see the original the archives may sent it over via email. I know they done this for me with James' sons baptism. I can't see William on the spreadsheet either. I did ask Whitehaven archives when they sent over James' baptism if they have the original can they send over (still awaiting a reply). Although it wont add much information I just like to collect documents even if it is not the James I am looking for no doubt I will find it useful at another stage
-
There are some missing years in those BTs, 1816-18.
Which would be why James's baptism in 1816 is not on FamilySearch.
The many many months I have put into searching online for him and having no joy was because it simply wasn't there ::)
-
Ah, we've all done it! A lot of the indexes on FamilySearch are from BTs, and there are often gaps in them.
Hopefully you can track down the baptism of William at the archives (don't know why we can't find him on the spreadsheet). Hopefully Relph will be correct, and the surname may look something more like Gilbank/s, etc.
There should be an occupation for John as well, which you can cross reference with your 1816 baptism (and with Elizabeth's baptism as well, hopefully)
Good luck!
-
James and Anne Gillbank were in the Westminster Union workhouse in 1882
Admitted 15* March.
Says born 1804 and 1808
Image, bit more on the next one
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-K93B-G
Discharged 28 March
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-K97M-3
*They seem to have got confused with the dates. Says 14th, but Wednesday was 15th
Confirmed by the Religious Creed register. She is spelt Ann here, two more images
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-KS9T-J
-
There's a rough settlement exam of James Gilbank in Westminster, dated 20 March 1882.
Does he say he married Ann Read in Lockerbie in 1840?
Not really helpful re his origins. Nice to have though!
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/1557/images/31952_a014461-00293
-
James and Anne Gillbank were in the Westminster Union workhouse in 1882
Admitted 15* March.
Says born 1804 and 1808
Image, bit more on the next one
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-K93B-G
Discharged 28 March
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-K97M-3
*They seem to have got confused with the dates. Says 14th, but Wednesday was 15th
Confirmed by the Religious Creed register. She is spelt Ann here, two more images
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3N2-KS9T-J
I dont trust the years of birth on these. Nor do I trust trust 1881 census either, the ages are miles apart. Compared to the 1851,1861,1871 the ages remain somewhat the same. In a previous post another user suggested that these years of birth might have been supplied by their sons wife who didn't have a clue
-
There's a rough settlement exam of James Gilbank in Westminster, dated 20 March 1882.
Does he say he married Ann Read in Lockerbie in 1840?
Not really helpful re his origins. Nice to have though!
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/1557/images/31952_a014461-00293
Oh wow! I had never came across that one before. How did you find that one?
-
Hi
I am frequently rummaging around in workhouse records on ancestry and familysearch. A lot are still unindexed. I knew they had some settlement exams for Westminster, so when I saw they were in the workhouse I had a quick browse!
Didn't really expect to find one, lucky they weren't in St George Hanover Square union, there are none.
James must have given the ages himself for the exam? Doesn't mean they were accurate. He might have lost track. I think it says he is 78 the 27 of next June.
Ann 74 the 22 next August.
Nice to have their birthdays!
-
Hi
I am frequently rummaging around in workhouse records on ancestry and familysearch. A lot are still unindexed. I knew they had some settlement exams for Westminster, so when I saw they were in the workhouse I had a quick browse!
Didn't really expect to find one, lucky they weren't in St George Hanover Square union, there are none.
James must have given the ages himself for the exam? Doesn't mean they were accurate. He might have lost track. I think it says he is 78 the 27 of next June.
Ann 74 the 22 next August.
Nice to have their birthdays!
That is very interesting thank you so much!
This now puts me in a bit of a strange situation, because I am unsure to rely on the ages he gave 1881 and after or previous ages which makes his year of birth 1816.
I am curious however as the birthday he gives in the workhouse is the 27th of June, and the baptism I have gives a date of 27th of October 1816. Exactly 3 months apart (excluding the year issue).
Ann's could be very useful if I go on Scotlands people tomorrow on my laptop could I possibly find a birth for her? I know Scottish and English records are different so I could be wrong?.
-
I'm not up on Scottish records, but Ann might be in them somewhere!
I would still think the earlier ages are more likely to be right.
James's rounded down age in 1841 would have been given by his employer? Unlikely he was ten plus years older.
And those ages would make Ann 42 when she had Benjamin. Perfectly possible, but doesn't seem likely to me, going on the flow of events, other census returns. And they were recorded in a workhouse in 1851.
25 in 1841, which could be the right age anyway!
-
I'm not up on Scottish records, but Ann might be in them somewhere!
I would still think the earlier ages are more likely to be right.
James's rounded down age in 1841 would have been given by his employer? Unlikely he was ten plus years older.
And those ages would make Ann 42 when she had Benjamin. Perfectly possible, but doesn't seem likely to me, going on the flow of events, other census returns. And they were recorded in a workhouse in 1851.
25 in 1841, which could be the right age anyway!
I have checked scotlands people previously for a marriage to no avail and I just had another look trying to narrow down the area again with no joy. However Lockerbie is north of Gretna, I suppose my theory of a Border marriage could still be possible. I will look more into this tomorrow on my laptop though!
Carlisle archives said the only documents they have for the Penrith workhouse in the 1851 area is administrative records and not records relating to anyone who had been in the workhouse.
My other thoughts are if they married in 1840, Ann isn't present on the 1841 census I have. So I could try and search for her otherwise the year for the marriage could be incorrect. I thought for that time period couples tended to marry then shortly after have children?
I do agree with the ages though as you said, it isn't until the 1881 census that their ages all of a sudden change dramatically. I could be completly wrong of course
-
I still can't read the word after Lockerbie, it does give a date of the marriage, 26 May, I think.
No certificate. Not married before. I think mentions children died in their infancy, then Benjamin, who is 32.
Very difficult to read the writing.
Is this Ann's death? Her age is younger again compared to the workhouse age in Westminster (though she was 60 in 1881)
Sep 1893 Fulham 1a 224
Gillbanks, Ann
age 77
He died in Fulham Middlesex 1886
Well, not long after leaving the Westminster Union workhouse, James seems to turn up in the Fulham one, without Ann.
We may be reliant on a religious creed register, this one is not very informative.
James Gillbanks, born 1803
Admitted from Hammersmith, 13 August 1882
Discharged 19 August
Readmitted 24 Sept 1882
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-L3NR-PHFG
We can pick him up in the next register, when he was still there
Discharged 5 Oct 1882
Admitted 9 Feb 1884
Discharged 18 Feb 1884
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3NR-PHK7
Brief stays. The register after that is on the same film, I don't think there are any more admissions.
Don't think they are on ancestry.
-
I still can't read the word after Lockerbie, it does give a date of the marriage, 26 May, I think.
No certificate. Not married before. I think mentions children died in their infancy, then Benjamin, who is 32.
Very difficult to read the writing.
Is this Ann's death? Her age is younger again compared to the workhouse age in Westminster (though she was 60 in 1881)
Sep 1893 Fulham 1a 224
Gillbanks, Ann
age 77
He died in Fulham Middlesex 1886
Well, not long after leaving the Westminster Union workhouse, James seems to turn up in the Fulham one, without Ann.
We may be reliant on a religious creed register, this one is not very informative.
James Gillbanks, born 1803
Admitted from Hammersmith, 13 August 1882
Discharged 19 August
Readmitted 24 Sept 1882
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-L3NR-PHFG
We can pick him up in the next register, when he was still there
Discharged 5 Oct 1882
Admitted 9 Feb 1884
Discharged 18 Feb 1884
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-P3NR-PHK7
Brief stays. The register after that is on the same film, I don't think there are any more admissions.
Don't think they are on ancestry.
That is Ann's death, I have her cert and she was living at 68 Ancill street Fulham. However that wasn't the address on James' death cert. This was why I struggled to trust the ages from 1881 and after. They seemed to be all over the place! I have tried to decipher some of the handwriting but I must say I am really struggling!
I had a search through Scotland's People this morning for a marriage with no luck, maybe this will be another mysterious event which will be hard to track down! Although James doesn't look to be the most accurate source of information. Mind you I suppose that back then he would have only had his memory to rely on.
-
It can be hard finding a Scottish marriage, hope James wasn't making it up!
Do you have Ann in 1891?
Benjamin Gillbanks is at 17 Ancill Street in 1893
Thomas Aves at number 68.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89FL-QCLV
1891 census has William Waterman, Cab Driver, at 68
-
It can be hard finding a Scottish marriage, hope James wasn't making it up!
Do you have Ann in 1891?
Benjamin Gillbanks is at 17 Ancill Street in 1893
Thomas Aves at number 68.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89FL-QCLV
1891 census has William Waterman, Cab Driver, at 68
I don't have a census for Ann in 1891, I have tried searching with no joy though!
-
It can be hard finding a Scottish marriage, hope James wasn't making it up!
Do you have Ann in 1891?
Benjamin Gillbanks is at 17 Ancill Street in 1893
Thomas Aves at number 68.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-89FL-QCLV
1891 census has William Waterman, Cab Driver, at 68
It is possible he is making it up! I was thinking looking at the settlement exam the children that died in infacny where born in Little Windmill street which if my memory serves me right is where they where living in 1877 when Benjamin married. If the children weren't born before Benjamin what are the chances that they married in 1840 and didn't have children until 10 years after?
-
I suppose James may have been genuinely mentally confused. On his earlier ages given he would have been in his mix sixties then, when probably most men still had to work. Perhaps for one reason or another he was unable to. A bit of a sad end for him.
-
I suppose James may have been genuinely mentally confused. On his earlier ages given he would have been in his mix sixties then, when probably most men still had to work. Perhaps for one reason or another he was unable to. A bit of a sad end for him.
Unless the exam means to list all children including all dead in infancy? Which would explain why Benjamin is listed. I can't make out what it says underneath Benjamin and his details but maybe he is the only child listed. My reading of that handwriting isn't doing me so well!
Could he of lied about his age to benefit himself within the workhouse? Given that they were from out of parish maybe the age difference was intentional. I could be very wrong but his age seems accurate up until they arrive in London. He was a Linen Bleacher however I am unsure if there is any health problems associated with that field of work?
He couldn't of had much luck in his life, things must have seemed to be picking up for him after they moved from Penrith only to end up in and out of another workhouse later in life. I do wonder if there was some health reason involved, assuming himself and Ann were fit and well and Benjamin seemed to be doing well I am not too sure why they wouldn't have continued to stay with Benjamin and his wife and children.
-
I think it just says married Lockerbie Scotland, written in a bit of a scrawl.
Under Benjamin it says born Penrith Cumberland
Then it is possibly indicating that Benjamin is married with 3 children?
Then that he is living at 15 Little Windmill Street
So that's all about Benjamin.
Then that James and Ann have come from 15 Little Windmill Street
Possibly that they had been there 16 months? 18 Nov 1880
Before that in Newcastle.
That might be the gist! They usually go something like that!
-
I think it just says married Lockerbie Scotland, written in a bit of a scrawl.
Under Benjamin it says born Penrith Cumberland
Then it is possibly indicating that Benjamin is married with 3 children?
Then that he is living at 15 Little Windmill Street
So that's all about Benjamin.
Then that James and Ann have come from 15 Little Windmill Street
Possibly that they had been there 16 months? 18 Nov 1880
Before that in Newcastle.
That might be the gist! They usually go something like that!
That adds up, in 1882 Benjamin did have three children (well he had two others also from a previous marriage in Newcastle but lets not go there! Lol)
I will continue searching for that marriage, even if the year isn't right... the location helps! Failing finding a marriage in Lockerbie I suppose I could attempt to revisit Gretna border marriages. I wish I knew the reality for the ages being all over the place.
The exam is honestly a lovely thing to have (although that may sound strange!) I can't thank you enough for finding that! I don't have much in my possession regarding documents for the family, I have a picture of Benjamin and a post card that was sent to one of Benjamin's daughters which I found on ebay of all things! Various things from newspapers but that is about all I have. I honestly thought I had found everything there was to find online in regards to Benjamin and his parents
-
I think it just says married Lockerbie Scotland, written in a bit of a scrawl.
Under Benjamin it says born Penrith Cumberland
Then it is possibly indicating that Benjamin is married with 3 children?
Then that he is living at 15 Little Windmill Street
So that's all about Benjamin.
Then that James and Ann have come from 15 Little Windmill Street
Possibly that they had been there 16 months? 18 Nov 1880
Before that in Newcastle.
That might be the gist! They usually go something like that!
I read the exam as:
Gilbank James 78 on 27 of next June
he's married to Ann Read ---- wife 74 the 22 next August at Lockerbie Scotland in 1840 no cert not married before
not sure what that it says in the top portion apart from that, inc all children and dead in their infancy at the end possibly?
and the rest is obviously as you said :)
-
Hi
I think we have most of it now, bar a few words (or the odd line!)
Pity there's not more, but those exams are usually interesting.
James hasn't left much trace really, haven't seen him in the newspapers. Which also bring our folks to life, don't they, if they manage to get in them. Probably they didn't want to, because they usually only reported ordinary folks if they had been naughty, or met with a horrible accident!
Benjamin in Fulham may have been asking for a copy of Napoleon speaks (should be talks?) of war, boys, in Songs and Recitations Wanted in the Newcastle Courant, 13 Feb 1892. There may be good news for him on the 27th!
But I don't have access to it (it's just a line)
-
Hi
I think we have most of it now, bar a few words (or the odd line!)
Pity there's not more, but those exams are usually interesting.
James hasn't left much trace really, haven't seen him in the newspapers. Which also bring our folks to life, don't they, if they manage to get in them. Probably they didn't want to, because they usually only reported ordinary folks if they had been naughty, or met with a horrible accident!
Benjamin in Fulham may have been asking for a copy of Napoleon speaks (should be talks?) of war, boys, in Songs and Recitations Wanted in the Newcastle Courant, 13 Feb 1892. There may be good news for him on the 27th!
But I don't have access to it (it's just a line)
I do have a subscription to the Britishnewspaper archives, as I hoped to find anything relating to James and Ann, however I know there is many articles in Fulham which mention Benjamin or his children. He was a vestryman for the council and I believe he done some charity work also. I found Benjamin's obituary on there some time ago, but there was never one for either of his parents. Which was a shame. I could spend hours on the paper archives reading all sorts! I even came across a story on my great grandfather being fined for being drunk in the streets. An interesting bunch we seem to be ;D
-
having said that I can't seem to find the one you refer to in Newcastle?
-
I was just doing a sweep of the North East region only, 1850-99, for Gillbanks, Gilbanks, Gilbank, etc.
Because of the problems of the misread text, the less you can put in to search for the better! Lucky it's a fairly rare name. That brought up Binjamin Gillbank.
Perhaps he had a piano in the house?
-
I was just doing a sweep of the North East region only, 1850-99, for Gillbanks, Gilbanks, Gilbank, etc.
Because of the problems of the misread text, the less you can put in to search for the better! Lucky it's a fairly rare name. That brought up Binjamin Gillbank.
Perhaps he had a piano in the house?
Just had a look through my records, 1891 he lived in 20 Upper Mall hammersmith (little difficult to work out which one it is on street view). 1892 he lived in 44 Mendora road Fulham, then from 1893 he was in 17 Ancill street Fulham until the turn of the century I think. I know between 1910 and his death in 1914 he lived in Danehurst street until about 1913 he moved to Kingwood road. I have checked some of these places out on Zoopla and it does make me wonder what could possibly be lurking in the loft's undiscovered
-
I must say though, that is a beautiful bit of music! I had never heard it before but even at the age of 24 I thoroughly enjoyed that
-
Pleased you liked it!
-
Interruption:
Do you have this already?
1844 Jan31 Thomas Gilbank, son of James Gilbank and Ann.
Abode: Manchester.
Occupation: moulder.
Bapt by W. W. Johnson.
Collegiate, Manchester, Lancs.
Pg41 Ent324
LDS 235704
-
Interruption:
Do you have this already?
1844 Jan31 Thomas Gilbank, son of James Gilbank and Ann.
Abode: Manchester.
Occupation: moulder.
Bapt by W. W. Johnson.
Collegiate, Manchester, Lancs.
Pg41 Ent324
LDS 235704
I have came across that one previously, I believe they are also the same parents of:
William Henry Gillbanks Mar qtr 1840 Manchester RD
Volume: 20
Page: 593
as on his marriage he lists James as his father with Occupation Moulder, there was a lot more Gilbanks' around back then compared to now. although the names are familiar most Gilbanks lines had the names Thomas, William, John, Isaac, Joseph etc.
It does make tracing the family difficult, even more so in the Cumberland area in that period as there was so many Gilbanks' with the same names. Although James seems to be less common for that time period but is still used on many Gilbanks lines that I know of (One of them is a Rootschat member).
Whilst researching I was able to pick out about 7 or so John's born in a very close time period across all of the Westmorland area. Although I do wonder if there is a link I cannot be sure. The other Gillbanks Rootschat member has spent so much time trying to work out what Gillbanks belongs to which family etc, I think going back far enough they are all related as its not a very common surname and its origins are in the Westmorland area.